This is a good explanation of how our income tax system really works.
Sometimes people exclaim; "It's just a tax cut for the rich!" and it is just accepted to be fact.
But what does that really mean?
Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, I hope the following will help. Please read it carefully.
Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." Dinner for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat their meal.
So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our income tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas where the atmosphere might be somewhat friendlier.
Government is the least efficient at doing anything and thus the WORST choice for providing ANY sort of product or service. Expanding the government's role should never be considered as it usually trashes the economy and productivity of a society.
Helping the poor should be the job of private citizens and charities, NOT the government! Private charities don't tend to sustain poverty like welfare does since there are finite resources. Also, why should I be forced to help my fellow man if I should not choose to? No one should be forced to take care of me or support me. I am an able-body and should take care of myself without the help of society.
Roads are (sometimes) an exception, but police, fire, and schools are all higher quality when the government is NOT involved but instead when the free market and private sector run its course.
The US was not founded on socialism, but on free-markets, limited government, personal freedoms, and individual responsibility. That's what is supposed to separate us from the rest of the world.
Orlando is very similar to SV in many ways. First off, the non technological aspects:
Weather: It doesn't get cold in the winter. It gets pretty warm in the summer, but overall it is great. Hurricanes are rare and don't do a lot of massive damage that far inland.
Non-natives: You'll be hard pressed to find a person older than 30 that was actually born in Florida. Therefore most of the people in the area are new, and are open to new ideas. The culture is VERY progressive which brings me to...
Diversity: Yankees, Southerners, Cubans, and Puerto Ricans make up the majority of the population. When more film activity was going on at Universal and Disney, there was some Southern Calif, flavor in the population too. It really is a melting pot. Most of these people are fairly educated too.
Cost of living: Until about 5-7 years ago, cost of living in Orlando used to be VERY cheap compared to most other urban area. Pricing has gone up but there is NO state income tax, and most sales taxes in the state are pretty low. The overall employment and wealth of the area is significantly higher than that of the rest of the nation (thus crime was low etc)
Now to the IMPORTANT aspects of Orlando:
University of Central Florida (UCF)- This is where NASA would pull lots of knowledge and heads from. HUGE CS/CompEngineering department.
NASA - duh
Naval Training Center - until a few years ago this was one of the two places where nuclear engineers were trained for the US Navy.
Lockeheed - yep
Martin Marietta - yep (now Lockheed-Martin). 3 or 4 plants in the area
KDF/General Dynamics - Yep
Harris - yep
Westinghouse - big plant
Siemens/Strongberg/Carlson - yep, big plant. Electrical distribution and phone systems
Veritas/Seagate - yep
Full-Sail - school of media (recording/ game design/video/film etc)
Disney and Universal employ lots of engineers and media types.
USAF - Yep the Air Force has several bases within an hour or two drive. Also a launching facility next to NASA.
NAWCTSD - Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (think simulators)
Comair Aviation Academy - flight school
Embry Riddle Flight aviation and flight school
GE - Yep
CENTCOM is in Tampa, 2 hours away
Air Force Agency for Modeling and Simulation (AFAMS) - next to UCF
Army Simulation, Training and Instrumentation Command (STRICOM) - also next to UCF
AT&T -Yep
Boeing - Yep
CAE Systems Flight & Simulation Training - yep
HP - Yep
Institute for Simulation and Training - next to UCF
However, this specific issue is very complicated and cannot be drawn in simple black and white. First off, telcos and providers are usually either subsidised, or heavily protected by the government. Either way, this is not a free market we are dealing with. Let's also remember that the Net itself is part of a governmental development.
So to say "let the free market take over, no government interference at all" would be irresponsible to blanket at this point. Now, if the government was never involved in this in the first place, then it wouldn't be an issue at all, and one, even someone as libertarian as myself, could sit back and EASILY say that the government should stay the hell out.
And I haven't read the legislation nor do I fully pretend to understand all of the issues involved. But, because the government is involved, it is complicated, overly complex, and probably unfairly stacked in favor of the biggest campaign contributors. If the gov had stayed out of the "communications business" in the first place, then none of this would be a problem that couldn't be solved within the confines of the free market.
Yes, while this is true, there are other aspects to consider.
First off, the Fed still has its hands in practically EVERY school district in the US. Segregation, standardized testing, and even truancy are just some of the ways the federal government gets involved in local issues that are not within it's jurisdiction.
Secondly, let's say you live in a Mormon community, such as the state of Utah. Well, if 90% of the populace is Mormon, then some of their agenda will trickle down into their schools. It's only natural. But that's the problem with "community/governmental education". If one is Jewish, lives in Utah, and doesn't want their kids to be subjected to any Mormon agenda, they don't have a choice unless they send their kids to a private school. You can reverse the roles, or change the location or whatever, but government schools are a BAD IDEA!
Private institutions are usually more respected and turn out better students than do governmental schools
Government schools are corrupt by their very nature. A school which is a branch of the government, will seek to achieve governmental agendas. This is only natural.
The government needs to get OUT of the business of education and let the private sector take over. Private schools do a better job of educating, and are not compulsory. There is also choice, and a free market.
Unfortunately AIM has started running these ads in the top of their client, and they are videos. And they will just start playing at random.
This does two things: it comes out of my speakers which are usually cranked pretty loud, AND they consume system resources temporarily enough to slow down my machine.
That PISSES ME OFF TO NO EXTENT, so I will usually close out of the AIM client (or minimize it), I am hoping that AIM is seeing how many people let the video run it's length, and when they look at my stat, they will realize that each and every time a video comes on, I close out of it. Perhaps they will stop sending those damn things.
I am a live audio engineer and have a degree in the study of the recording industry.
The cavity searches are the results of lawsuits against promoters and venues (and sometimes even artists) due to someone getting stabbed, shot, injured, poked, punctured, etc inside of an event. Over the course of time the courts have found liability more and more in the concert-goers' favor, thus the promoter and artists are forced to cover themselves to reduce liability as much as possible. Treating everyone to a long and generous cavity search is one way to do that. Thank the lawyers for that one!
Regarding volume, the sound guys (yes that's me) have to be able to ensure that every seat in the venue has the ability to hear the concert with intelligibility, over the crowd noise. This can either be done by cranking the main set of speakers up, or by distributing the sound via a delayed speaker system. Delayed speakers allow a smaller distance between you and the speaker, thus the volume must be lower (sound loses half it's volume every time the distance is doubled).
Since every venue is differently sized and shaped, and most large tours carry their own gear, and bringing enough gear for a delayed speaker system is exceptionally complicated (sometimes on the order of magnitude). Thus it is not economical, or logistically feasible to bring enough delays in order to lower the overall volume.
Besides, at a "rock show" people WANT it loud. To me personally, there is no better feeling than to hear my favorite songs by my favorite volumes as loud as I can possibly stand it. Yes I know I am damaging my hearing and all that, but I don't get to hear those songs performed that loud very often.
I would say that given our current system and the methods of functionality, leaving the federal government OUT of this would probably be a wise choice.
Although I think a case could be made for the fed having jurisdiction here (true interstate-commerce), they usually complicate any situation they get involved in. The legislation would probably have soo many loopholes and special interest clauses that it would cause more harm than fixes.
My advice is for the states (or the people at least) to work on this without the help of the federal government. The less of a hand they have in things, the better.
...inherently distrust government no matter who is in power. Libertarians always view the government as untrustworthy, expansive, over-reaching, and inefficient by it's very nature. Thus the idea is to limit the government to its most basic and fundamental operations as set forth in the Constitution by our founding fathers.
The lines between the Dems and the Reps here in the US have blurred to the point that distinction is negligible.
"medical advances [should]would not be hamstrung by excessive regulation as they are today. Even former FDA Commissioner Donald Kennedy acknowledged, "...the pattern of intervention into science from a combination of local, state, and federal sources has moved from reasonable control to something close to chaotic strangulation." Better medical advances mean better overall health."
As taxpayers, we first pay government to create the problem (e.g., FDA) and then pay once again for the government-mandated solution (e.g., NIH).
Delays caused by FDA regulations cost many more lives than they save. The cure is worse than the disease. For the terminally ill, denying access to drugs that could potentially save their lives, prolong their lives, or make them more comfortable, is especially cruel.
"FDA delays mean that companies have fewer years left on their patent to recover the cost of development when a drug is finally marketed. As delays get longer, fewer drugs have enough market life to pay for themselves before going generic. Drugs that could save lives or alleviate suffering are simply not offered to the public because the cost of their development can't be recovered. In all likelihood, drugs that are never developed because of FDA regulations cost even more lives than the delays!"
"The Thalidomide tragedy was the worst drug disaster in modern history, yet it pales in comparison to the damage done by the delays of life-saving drugs. The FDA's three year delay in introducing propranolol after it was sold in Europe, cost (conservatively) 30,000 U.S. lives. In comparison, 10,000 children were affected by thalidomide. Every time the FDA delays a life-saving drug, we have the equivalent of three thalidomide tragedies.
Hey - a friend of mine (no kidding) designed and constructed the crapper and the emergency escape lock on the ISS. I guess you could call him the overlord of orbital evacuations!
It is nice to see others on/. that have some intelligence and knowledge of US government and how it is supposed to work with states vs federal interaction.
Slashdot Mirror
This is a good explanation of how our income tax system really works.
Sometimes people exclaim; "It's just a tax cut for the rich!" and it is just accepted to be fact.
But what does that really mean?
Just in case you are not completely clear on this issue, I hope the following will help. Please read it carefully.
Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand.
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner and the bill for all ten comes to $100.
If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." Dinner for the ten now cost just $80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'
They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to eat their meal.
So, the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.
And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33% savings).
The seventh now paid $5 instead of $7 (28% savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got $10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"
"That's true!!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our income tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start eating overseas where the atmosphere might be somewhat friendlier.
You are obviously a socialist.
Government is the least efficient at doing anything and thus the WORST choice for providing ANY sort of product or service. Expanding the government's role should never be considered as it usually trashes the economy and productivity of a society.
Helping the poor should be the job of private citizens and charities, NOT the government! Private charities don't tend to sustain poverty like welfare does since there are finite resources. Also, why should I be forced to help my fellow man if I should not choose to? No one should be forced to take care of me or support me. I am an able-body and should take care of myself without the help of society.
Roads are (sometimes) an exception, but police, fire, and schools are all higher quality when the government is NOT involved but instead when the free market and private sector run its course.
The US was not founded on socialism, but on free-markets, limited government, personal freedoms, and individual responsibility. That's what is supposed to separate us from the rest of the world.
Orlando is very similar to SV in many ways. First off, the non technological aspects:
Weather: It doesn't get cold in the winter. It gets pretty warm in the summer, but overall it is great. Hurricanes are rare and don't do a lot of massive damage that far inland.
Non-natives: You'll be hard pressed to find a person older than 30 that was actually born in Florida. Therefore most of the people in the area are new, and are open to new ideas. The culture is VERY progressive which brings me to...
Diversity: Yankees, Southerners, Cubans, and Puerto Ricans make up the majority of the population. When more film activity was going on at Universal and Disney, there was some Southern Calif, flavor in the population too. It really is a melting pot. Most of these people are fairly educated too.
Cost of living: Until about 5-7 years ago, cost of living in Orlando used to be VERY cheap compared to most other urban area. Pricing has gone up but there is NO state income tax, and most sales taxes in the state are pretty low. The overall employment and wealth of the area is significantly higher than that of the rest of the nation (thus crime was low etc)
Now to the IMPORTANT aspects of Orlando:
University of Central Florida (UCF)- This is where NASA would pull lots of knowledge and heads from. HUGE CS/CompEngineering department.
NASA - duh
Naval Training Center - until a few years ago this was one of the two places where nuclear engineers were trained for the US Navy.
Lockeheed - yep
Martin Marietta - yep (now Lockheed-Martin). 3 or 4 plants in the area
KDF/General Dynamics - Yep
Harris - yep
Westinghouse - big plant
Siemens/Strongberg/Carlson - yep, big plant. Electrical distribution and phone systems
Veritas/Seagate - yep
Full-Sail - school of media (recording/ game design/video/film etc)
Disney and Universal employ lots of engineers and media types.
USAF - Yep the Air Force has several bases within an hour or two drive. Also a launching facility next to NASA.
NAWCTSD - Naval Air Warfare Center Training Systems Division (think simulators)
Comair Aviation Academy - flight school
Embry Riddle Flight aviation and flight school
GE - Yep
CENTCOM is in Tampa, 2 hours away
Air Force Agency for Modeling and Simulation (AFAMS) - next to UCF
Army Simulation, Training and Instrumentation Command (STRICOM) - also next to UCF
AT&T -Yep
Boeing - Yep
CAE Systems Flight & Simulation Training - yep
HP - Yep
Institute for Simulation and Training - next to UCF
Northrop Grumman - yep
Raytheon Systems - yep
Here is a list of companies next to UCF in an area called "Research Park": http://www.cfrp.org/tenants.html
Orlando is a technological playground and absolutely worthy of the title "SV-East"
I am a libertarian absolutely.
However, this specific issue is very complicated and cannot be drawn in simple black and white. First off, telcos and providers are usually either subsidised, or heavily protected by the government. Either way, this is not a free market we are dealing with. Let's also remember that the Net itself is part of a governmental development.
So to say "let the free market take over, no government interference at all" would be irresponsible to blanket at this point. Now, if the government was never involved in this in the first place, then it wouldn't be an issue at all, and one, even someone as libertarian as myself, could sit back and EASILY say that the government should stay the hell out.
And I haven't read the legislation nor do I fully pretend to understand all of the issues involved. But, because the government is involved, it is complicated, overly complex, and probably unfairly stacked in favor of the biggest campaign contributors. If the gov had stayed out of the "communications business" in the first place, then none of this would be a problem that couldn't be solved within the confines of the free market.
Yes, while this is true, there are other aspects to consider.
First off, the Fed still has its hands in practically EVERY school district in the US. Segregation, standardized testing, and even truancy are just some of the ways the federal government gets involved in local issues that are not within it's jurisdiction.
Secondly, let's say you live in a Mormon community, such as the state of Utah. Well, if 90% of the populace is Mormon, then some of their agenda will trickle down into their schools. It's only natural. But that's the problem with "community/governmental education". If one is Jewish, lives in Utah, and doesn't want their kids to be subjected to any Mormon agenda, they don't have a choice unless they send their kids to a private school. You can reverse the roles, or change the location or whatever, but government schools are a BAD IDEA!
Private institutions are usually more respected and turn out better students than do governmental schools
*brain.... *overload*...*can't process*...*convulsions*
Obligatory Austin Powers joke: "oh crikey... I've gone cross-eyed"
Government schools are corrupt by their very nature. A school which is a branch of the government, will seek to achieve governmental agendas. This is only natural.
The government needs to get OUT of the business of education and let the private sector take over. Private schools do a better job of educating, and are not compulsory. There is also choice, and a free market.
Unfortunately AIM has started running these ads in the top of their client, and they are videos. And they will just start playing at random.
This does two things: it comes out of my speakers which are usually cranked pretty loud, AND they consume system resources temporarily enough to slow down my machine.
That PISSES ME OFF TO NO EXTENT, so I will usually close out of the AIM client (or minimize it), I am hoping that AIM is seeing how many people let the video run it's length, and when they look at my stat, they will realize that each and every time a video comes on, I close out of it. Perhaps they will stop sending those damn things.
I am a live audio engineer and have a degree in the study of the recording industry.
The cavity searches are the results of lawsuits against promoters and venues (and sometimes even artists) due to someone getting stabbed, shot, injured, poked, punctured, etc inside of an event. Over the course of time the courts have found liability more and more in the concert-goers' favor, thus the promoter and artists are forced to cover themselves to reduce liability as much as possible. Treating everyone to a long and generous cavity search is one way to do that. Thank the lawyers for that one!
Regarding volume, the sound guys (yes that's me) have to be able to ensure that every seat in the venue has the ability to hear the concert with intelligibility, over the crowd noise. This can either be done by cranking the main set of speakers up, or by distributing the sound via a delayed speaker system. Delayed speakers allow a smaller distance between you and the speaker, thus the volume must be lower (sound loses half it's volume every time the distance is doubled).
Since every venue is differently sized and shaped, and most large tours carry their own gear, and bringing enough gear for a delayed speaker system is exceptionally complicated (sometimes on the order of magnitude). Thus it is not economical, or logistically feasible to bring enough delays in order to lower the overall volume.
Besides, at a "rock show" people WANT it loud. To me personally, there is no better feeling than to hear my favorite songs by my favorite volumes as loud as I can possibly stand it. Yes I know I am damaging my hearing and all that, but I don't get to hear those songs performed that loud very often.
I would say that given our current system and the methods of functionality, leaving the federal government OUT of this would probably be a wise choice.
Although I think a case could be made for the fed having jurisdiction here (true interstate-commerce), they usually complicate any situation they get involved in. The legislation would probably have soo many loopholes and special interest clauses that it would cause more harm than fixes.
My advice is for the states (or the people at least) to work on this without the help of the federal government. The less of a hand they have in things, the better.
I think you misspelled "libertarian"
...inherently distrust government no matter who is in power. Libertarians always view the government as untrustworthy, expansive, over-reaching, and inefficient by it's very nature. Thus the idea is to limit the government to its most basic and fundamental operations as set forth in the Constitution by our founding fathers.
The lines between the Dems and the Reps here in the US have blurred to the point that distinction is negligible.
...will have attendents that will pump balls. Heh Heh Heh.
This already sort of exists: http://www.startrekexp.com/
...telescope photos YOU!
I am strictly libertarian. However, IMO NASA should've NEVER seperated from the USAF/DoD.
The DoD has a purpose: defense. NASA doesn't really have a purpose.
the paparazzi will be using it to view J-Lo's ass!
"medical advances [should]would not be hamstrung by excessive regulation as they are today. Even former FDA Commissioner Donald Kennedy acknowledged, "...the pattern of intervention into science from a combination of local, state, and federal sources has moved from reasonable control to something close to chaotic strangulation." Better medical advances mean better overall health."
As taxpayers, we first pay government to create the problem (e.g., FDA) and then pay once again for the government-mandated solution (e.g., NIH).
Delays caused by FDA regulations cost many more lives than they save. The cure is worse than the disease. For the terminally ill, denying access to drugs that could potentially save their lives, prolong their lives, or make them more comfortable, is especially cruel.
"FDA delays mean that companies have fewer years left on their patent to recover the cost of development when a drug is finally marketed. As delays get longer, fewer drugs have enough market life to pay for themselves before going generic. Drugs that could save lives or alleviate suffering are simply not offered to the public because the cost of their development can't be recovered. In all likelihood, drugs that are never developed because of FDA regulations cost even more lives than the delays!"
"The Thalidomide tragedy was the worst drug disaster in modern history, yet it pales in comparison to the damage done by the delays of life-saving drugs. The FDA's three year delay in introducing propranolol after it was sold in Europe, cost (conservatively) 30,000 U.S. lives. In comparison, 10,000 children were affected by thalidomide. Every time the FDA delays a life-saving drug, we have the equivalent of three thalidomide tragedies.
Source:
Dr. Ruwart
http://www.theadvocates.org/ruwart/
Hey - a friend of mine (no kidding) designed and constructed the crapper and the emergency escape lock on the ISS. I guess you could call him the overlord of orbital evacuations!
It is nice to see others on /. that have some intelligence and knowledge of US government and how it is supposed to work with states vs federal interaction.
Stab your friend in the throat and put them, and the rest of us, out of misery!
The world needs LESS attorneys, not MORE!
Thanks!
...but they found out my parents were married ;-)
I find that attorneys have even less of a soul.
shirt reports you!
Most blonde women have intelligent DNA in them... the problem is they tend to spit it out ;-)